Rule Changes - Dogs' involvement

[DexterTan]

I will only attend to hurl abuse and voice my disapproval.

Shaun Higgins can attest to such skill

 

[Fossie 32]

.............
Remove below the knees rule, pay frees for dangerous play if players go too hard when someone is already there.

Fix the ******* HTB/prior rules, in a very congested game there has been record tackle numbers but most times players are allowed to drop the ball & someone else gets it to repeat the process. There was one game this season both teams had over 100 tackles, so 200+ and only a handful of HTB decisions. Come onnnnnn

Sounds pretty sensible

 

[maddog37]

In conjunction with trying to reduce tackles and opening up the game I feel they need to extend the legal kick length or footy will develop into non stop short kick keepings off like the Hawks do when in control. That bores me to tears.

 

[Testekill]

In conjunction with trying to reduce tackles and opening up the game I feel they need to extend the legal kick length or footy will develop into non stop short kick keepings off like the Hawks do when in control. That bores me to tears.

I remember at one point that the VFL made backwards kicks play on. That seems like it would work fine

 

[flamethrower]

If the AFL want to trial some rules to appease the theatre going fan, to the detriment of the die hard long term supporters, then use games that are irrelevant to us this year - the finals.

How many sharks can one man jump in a job without getting the lemon and sars?

 

[BRWB]

To improve player ball handling and fix congestion the ball needs to be changed to a round one.

 

[Floridog]

To improve player ball handling and fix congestion the ball needs to be changed to a round one.

Perhaps they should just use a golden snitch. That would relieve congestion.

 

[VogonProsthetnic]

One of the big attractions of our game when it first started I thought was that had virtually no rules. So why do we keep making up new rules?

Follow the KISS principle and everything will be ok.

 

[LittleG]

Why not just throw the ball up within 8 seconds of the bounce whistle and get rid of ruck nominations?
1 player per team can compete in the ruck and penalise the second one in.

It's really that simple....

 

[dogwatch]

Why not just throw the ball up within 8 seconds of the bounce whistle and get rid of ruck nominations?
1 player per team can compete in the ruck and penalise the second one in.

It's really that simple....

I agree with this if they must have only one from each side. However there might still be some AFL concern that someone like Roughy might feign that he's preparing to contest a ball-up but at the last second Lin Jong screams in from another direction leaps over everyone and wins the tap. Roughy just holds his ground where he was standing, a few metres from where the ball up took place. Legal or not?

 

[LittleG]

I agree with this if they must have only one from each side. However there might still be some AFL concern that someone like Roughy might feign that he's preparing to contest a ball-up but at the last second Lin Jong screams in from another direction leaps over everyone and wins the tap. Roughy just holds his ground where he was standing, a few metres from where the ball up took place. Legal or not?

Legal as long as Roughhead isn't blocking their ruck.

 

[dogwatch]

Legal as long as Roughhead isn't blocking their ruck.

Maybe I wasn't clear. Yes, I know it's legal now but this was in the context of not needing to nominate who's taking the tap.

I meant if you only want one player up in the ruck should it be legal to pretend it's player A when in fact the plan is to use player B as a surprise tactic.

I think the whole rule is a farce anyway, but if they insist on only one player up the AFL might also take a dim view of this sort of subterfuge. Can't have any tactical innovation now, can we?

If the game really is getting as boring as batshit it could be partly the fault of the AFL with its ridiculous rule changes.

 

[Tommycash]

Maybe I wasn't clear. Yes, I know it's legal now but this was in the context of not needing to nominate who's taking the tap.

I meant if you only want one player up in the ruck should it be legal to pretend it's player A when in fact the plan is to use player B as a surprise tactic.

I think the whole rule is a farce anyway, but if they insist on only one player up the AFL might also take a dim view of this sort of subterfuge. Can't have any tactical innovation now, can we?

If the game really is getting as boring as batshit it could be partly the fault of the AFL with its ridiculous rule changes.

If someone engages the oppo's ruck and another goes for the tap, that must surely be made illegal, in any future world. However if Roughie is standing around minding his own business, so be it!

 

[dogwatch]

If someone engages the oppo's ruck and another goes for the tap, that must surely be made illegal, in any future world. However if Roughie is standing around minding his own business, so be it!

Yep, that's how I'd see it. Would of course prefer to see no third man up rule in the first place but that appears to be a closed issue.